There are some subtleties that seem to make this situation different than Comcast's strictly prioritizing some internet traffic over others. Apple seems to want to use the part of the pipe usually reserved for cable VOD. Though perhaps you could argue that separating VOD from the internet portion of the pipe (which has been the case ever since VOD existed) is itself a violation of net neutrality principles.
As you mentioned, a lot of people already have a problem with cable companies' VOD getting preferential treatment, but I think it's an order of magnitude worse for cable companies to then lease out the VOD bandwidth they've carved out for themselves to the highest bidder.
With this precedent set, Youtube, Netflix, and Amazon Prime could all end up paying a Comcast Tax to remain competitive with Apple. If that happens, all of a sudden there will be way fewer video or other high bandwidth startups, unless they're lucky enough to get sufficient VC to pay off the cable companies. No new Dropboxes or Vimeos.
Also, I think this situation is fairly different than, say, Motorola manufacturing set-top boxes for cable companies.
The Apple boxes will be sold in retail stores directly to the consumer, and are an attempt by Apple to create a Netflix/Roku killer. Apple paying a Comcast tax to gain competitive advantage seems to be a pretty clear violation of what Net Neutrality was all about.
So, because Netflix and Youtube get the same deal to compete w/ Apple, it somehow affects companies in the dropbox space?
I think there are a few things -- like video -- that are sensitive to latency and need consistent bandwidth. Most things aren't like that. Dropbox specifically was built to sync over slower connections.
I'm not sure how I feel about what Apple's doing here, but I know I feel differently than you do about the implications.
I guess you could quibble with Dropbox as an example (except when syncing with a new device, or uploading a massive file to immediately transfer to another device or share with others), but I don't think it changes my point at all.
In fact, it probably helps prove it by demonstrating the lengths U.S. startups have to go to to work around the bandwidth congestion created by the cable monopolies.
It also shows that the end of Net Neutrality will hurt innovation. Online file storage didn't really take off until Dropbox came up with a way to work around shitty bandwidth (as well as device interoperability). You claim that only a handful of video startups would be affected, but I bet the real number is probably in the hundreds or thousands, and many of those haven't yet had the opportunity to build a userbase big enough to pay a bandwidth tax. There could be countless other applications in VR, gaming, video, and who knows what other sectors, that are held back because of the bandwidth situation in the U.S, and an end to Net Neutrality would almost certainly make it worse.
